And so the backlash against autism spectrum begins...
There are many things wrong with the article, but my main gripe is how the author totally ignores the Asperger's end of the spectrum. Calling it a spectrum provides great insight (there are a large number of behaviors, and individuals have various combinations of each to a varying degree), but the author uses it to blur the line between what I would call functioning and non-functioning individuals (and seemingly on purpose). "Full" autism causes people to be unable to cope with the regualar world and all its stresses (see article about how autistics can take an airplane[1]). The author is exploiting the fear of parents whose children are found to be on the "autistic spectrum" (but more likely on the more functioning Asperger's end) and justifying a refusal of the diagnosis.
My perception is that Asperger's individuals (and the William in the article seems to fit--though I am not a doctor) have quirks and are difficult to raise. They have emotional issues and are socially maladapted. But they can lead fully independent lives and often contribute greatly to society. My issue with the author is that I believe Asperger's children can benefit greatly from psychological help, to teach them emotional and social skills in a way that parents can't. I believe that in certain cases, this help is critical to making the difference between the Asperger's person leading an almost normal life (including getting married and having kids), and leading a miserable life as a social outcast (bullied, unable to be in a relationship, unable to deal with child-raising).
So I think more nuance is in order, more distinction between autism and Asperger's (even though they are on the same spectrum), and more help for Asperger's children and adults, not less.
Asperger's has been pushed off of the Euphemism Treadmill by the APA from their DSM book, the same organisation that had homosexuality down as a mental illness. It's replacement: "Autism spectrum disorder".
Now when you put something in a 'spectrum' it allows you to talk about somebody with a very mild tick, and someone with an extreme condition in the same breath. Some examples: "homosexuality"(sic), "perversion", "alcoholism", "racism" and "substance abuse". You can put any of those on a spectrum and it will allow you to make some very unfair comparisons between two very different people.
I disagree that putting anything on a spectrum provides a great deal of insight. I think it's intellectually lazy and actually quite dangerous an idea. I find as you found, that people can use it to blur lines that should not be blurred.
A relative once said that the autism spectrum helped her understand that her son's and husband's predisposition to use logic to justify their behaviour was a genetic fault. She found that concept comforting, because otherwise she couldn't understand why they don't agree with her on certain matters. Neither of them have been diagnosed, and they seem perfectly fine to me. I pointed out to her that that didn't represent a huge leap in understanding them.
There are many things wrong with the article, but my main gripe is how the author totally ignores the Asperger's end of the spectrum. Calling it a spectrum provides great insight (there are a large number of behaviors, and individuals have various combinations of each to a varying degree), but the author uses it to blur the line between what I would call functioning and non-functioning individuals (and seemingly on purpose). "Full" autism causes people to be unable to cope with the regualar world and all its stresses (see article about how autistics can take an airplane[1]). The author is exploiting the fear of parents whose children are found to be on the "autistic spectrum" (but more likely on the more functioning Asperger's end) and justifying a refusal of the diagnosis.
My perception is that Asperger's individuals (and the William in the article seems to fit--though I am not a doctor) have quirks and are difficult to raise. They have emotional issues and are socially maladapted. But they can lead fully independent lives and often contribute greatly to society. My issue with the author is that I believe Asperger's children can benefit greatly from psychological help, to teach them emotional and social skills in a way that parents can't. I believe that in certain cases, this help is critical to making the difference between the Asperger's person leading an almost normal life (including getting married and having kids), and leading a miserable life as a social outcast (bullied, unable to be in a relationship, unable to deal with child-raising).
So I think more nuance is in order, more distinction between autism and Asperger's (even though they are on the same spectrum), and more help for Asperger's children and adults, not less.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23989422